It is time to pose directly and seriously the question of the fate of Marxist philosophical theory at the end of the twentieth century. And not only the question of Marxism in general, but more specifically the question of Leninism, of the essence of the "Leninist stage in the development of the philosophy of Marxism," of Lenin the philosopher. It is Lenin's theoretical legacy that calls for an especially careful investigation today, because it above all is what has undergone canonization (...) and distortion for over half a century. The time has finally come, it seems, for an assiduous analysis of the set of ideas dubbed "Lenin's creative contribution to the philosophy of Marxism" and even the "Leninist stage in the history of Marxist philosophy." Of course, renunciation of a cultist, essentially religious relation to Leninism is bound to be painful and is bound to affect the interests of those for whom it is easier to believe than to know…. But there is simply no other way to a genuine, noniconographic Lenin than a scholarly study of his activity and the ideas he developed. (shrink)

Let me offer you some reflections of a general nature. My primary objective is to set out at least some of the problems I encountered in my first approaches to this topic. Of course, people can say that a discourse on this topic is premature, that the Soviet period of our history is not even history in the strict sense, at least not for representatives of the generation that passed a good proportion of its creative life in it. For them (...) this is not history but life, passions that have not been and, perhaps, never can be overcome, likes and dislikes that are rooted in the brain and the heart. This is our fate, if you will, and, as they say, it is best left alone. That is true. We, of course, still relate to our philosophical past emotionally, for the most part, rather than in an investigative, intellectual, objective spirit. And yet, "an epoch has come to a close. It must be described". (shrink)